Chapter 6Notes and Letters to the Editor of Mother India on Indian and World Events, 1949–1950 · On the Kashmir Problem

Speech, which has been a sort of beacon to me for years, I have been working for the reintegration of Hindu culture . . . But I am neither learned nor a profound thinker. I can contribute only my faith and the little energy which has been vouchsafed to me. I only pray that strength may be given to me to carry forward the message of the Seers of whom, in my opinion, you are the only surviving Apostle. What shall I do now?

My dear Kanubhai

In reply to your letter to him of July 30t.h. 1950 Sri Aurobindo has asked me to write to you the following: — 2

“Your feeling that there should be reintegration of Indian Culture under modern conditions is quite right. It is the work that has to be done. And as far as Sri Aurobindo can see at present Indian Spiritual Culture has a great and bright future before it. It is the future power that might dominate the world.

So, your efforts in carrying out that work are quite in the right direction and in carrying out that work you would have his full support and blessings.”

3 August 1950 2 The paragraphs that follow were dictated by Sri Aurobindo to A. B. Purani and sent to Munshi over Purani’s signature. — Ed.

Notes and Letters

to the Editor of Mother India

on Indian and World Events

1949–1950 I don’t want Pakistan to endure, made perfectly clear. Division must go — does not mean that division must be allowed to last in some form or other. Continued partition of India into two Federations one Hindu and one Muslim even if somehow connected together is no part of my idea of the Union of India.

March 1949

India can’t remain in Dominion. It had decided to be a free republic and that can’t be changed. On that basis it can have relations with Commonwealth if it wants.

Spirituality cannot be affirmed in a political constitution. You can add spirituality in a matter of the Spirit and not of constitutional politics.

April 1949 Amal

The Unity Party, Sri Aurobindo says, cannot be said to represent Sri Aurobindo’s views [nor can it be said]1 that its political programme is backed up by him. But perhaps without committing yourself you can say there is a Party, especially in Bengal, which is working for Indian Unity — apart from the 1 MS (dictated) or well-known Forward Block which has the same end in view though working on a different line.

25.4.1949

June 27 1949 Amal,

I sent you a telegram asking you to withhold the spokesman’s statement.2 It was not to be republished. The statement does not adequately represent Sri Aurobindo’s views. It over-stresses one point and leaves out others which are as important, but I see that you have already featured it in Mother India. Anyway Sri Aurobindo doesn’t want anything further to be written about his view on the French India question; what is done is done but in future he wishes to remain silent unless an imperative need arises for a statement. Just now Sri Aurobindo does not want strong attacks to be made on the policy of the Congress Government as by their action they have removed many of the difficulties of the Asram and all that it needs for its institutions are coming in freely as a result of special or-ders given by the Madras Government so he does not want to figure as their enemy or opponent. Certain things in their attitude may seem doubtful but he does not want them too much stressed at present unless it becomes very necessary to do so.

About your Franco-India article, the main objection is that Mother does not want herself to be represented in that way (or in any way) and she objects to figuring in any special way as a representative of France or French culture. The article is inopportune at this moment. It contains many statements that would have to be modified or not put forward at all.

As for the contravention article Sri Aurobindo thought that 2 This letter, dictated by Sri Aurobindo, was sent over the signature of Nolini Kanta Gupta. The “spokesman’s statement” was an interview that Nolini gave to a press agency on 14 June that was published in Mother India on 25 June. See Note on the Texts, pages 604–5, for details. — Ed.